Harish Sagar & Anr. Vs the State & Anr.

¶1

$~77& 78

¶2

IN THE HIGH COURT OF DELHI AT NEW DELHI

¶3

% Date of Decision: 08^th April, 2026

¶4

CRL.M.C. 1509/2025 HARSHDEEP @ NONU & ORS. .....Petitioner Through: Ms. Deeksha Anand, Proxy counsel. versus THE STATE GOVT. OF NCT OF DELHI AND ANR.

¶5

.....Respondent Through: Ms. Priyanka Dalal, APP for the State with SI Pushpendra Singh. Mr. AK Verma, Advocate for R-2 alongwith Respondent No.2 in person.

¶6

W.P.(CRL) 1287/2025 HARISH SAGAR & ANR. .....Petitioner Through: Mr. A.K. Verma, Advocate alongwith Petitioner in person. versus THE STATE & ANR. .....Respondent Through: Mr. Sanjay Lao, Standing Counsel for the State with SI Pushpendra Singh. Ms. Deeksha Anand, Proxy counsel for R-2.

¶7

CORAM:

¶8

HON'BLE MR. JUSTICE MANOJ JAIN J U D G M E N T (oral)

¶9

Both these petitions seek quashing of respective FIRs and being connected and cross-cases, both the petitions have been taken up together. 2. In CRL.M.C. 1509/2025, all the seven petitioners seek quashing of FIR No.0574/2024 dated 02.11.2024, registered at Police Station Jagat Puri, for commission of offence under Section 110 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023 (corresponding Section 308 IPC), along with all consequential

¶10

Signature Not Verified

¶11

CRL.M.C. 1509/2025 & W.P.(CRL) 1287/2025 1

¶12

Signed By:SONIA THAPLIYAL Signing Da te:1 0.04.2026 15:06:06

¶13

proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of compromise arrived at between the parties. Petitioner No.1 (in CRL.M.C. 1509/2025) is, reportedly, in Finland where he is pursuing his studies.

¶14

In the abovesaid incident, the injuries were received by two persons i.e. Braj Bahadur Singh and his son Daksh and they both are present in person and have been duly identified by their counsel as well as by investigating officer. They reiterate the terms of settlement.

¶15

Settlement took place between amongst the parties on 08.01.2025.

¶16

Fact, however, remains that one of the injured i.e. Daksh is not signatory to the abovesaid settlement but during the course of the proceedings today, he has submitted before this Court that the matter has been amicably settled and, therefore, he, also, would have no objection if the FIR in question is quashed.

¶17

Such Settlement Deed has been signed by his father- Braj Bahadur Singh who reiterates the terms of settlement.

¶18

The other matter i.e. W.P.(CRL) 1287/2025 seeks quashing of FIR No.0591/2024 dated 22.11.2024, registered at Police Station Jagat Puri, for commission of offences under Sections 115/74/351(2)/79/3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023 (corresponding Sections 323/354/506/509/34 IPC), along with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, on the basis of compromise arrived at between the parties. Though, the abovesaid FIR had been registered on 22.11.2024, as per the averments appearing in the FIR, the complainant (respondent No.2) referred to the same incident and claimed that her modesty was outraged and that she was given simple hurt and was threatened to be eliminated by the other side.

¶19

Respondent no. 2, who is referred to as “J”, is also present in person.

¶20

CRL.M.C. 1509/2025 & W.P.(CRL) 1287/2025 2

¶21

Signature Not Verified

¶22

Signed By:SONIA THAPLIYAL Signing Da te:1 0.04.2026 15:06:06

¶23

She is duly identified by her counsel, who appears through video-conferencing and investigating officer, who is present in Court.

¶24

She is signatory to the abovesaid settlement dated 08.01.2025 and she also reiterates that the matter has been amicably settled between the parties with the intervention of respected members of the locality, well-wishers, family members and friends.

¶25

Charge-sheet in both the matters have already been filed though charges are yet not framed.

¶26

Both the sides submit that they are neighbours and now residing in complete peace and harmony and have entered into the abovesaid settlement out of their own free will, without any coercion and influence from any corner whatsoever and therefore, they would have „ no objection ‟ if both the FIRs are quashed.

¶27

In view of the settlement arrived at between the parties, continuing with criminal proceedings would serve no useful purpose. Even otherwise, the MLCs which have been placed on record do not reveal any serious injury. In Narinder Singh & Ors. vs. State of Punjab & Anr., (2014) 6 SCC 466, the Apex Court observed that proceedings, even in non-compoundable cases, can be quashed on the basis of settlement provided that the Court is satisfied that there was no meaningful purpose in continuing with the proceedings, and that the scope of conviction was remote and bleak.

¶28

Reference be made to Sheikh Mohd. & Ors. Vs. The State NCT of Delhi & Ors. (in Crl. M.C. 8137/2025; DoD 17.03.2026), Prem Chand Gupta & Ors. Vs. The State (NCT of Delhi) & Ors. (Crl. M.C. 1985/2026; DoD 18.03.2026) and Rohit Sharma & Anr. Vs. The State (Govt. of NCT) of Delhi & Ors . (Crl. M.C. 2088/2025; DoD 24.03.2026), wherein this Court, after

¶29

CRL.M.C. 1509/2025 & W.P.(CRL) 1287/2025 3

¶30

Signature Not Verified

¶31

Signed By:SONIA THAPLIYAL Signing Da te:1 0.04.2026 15:06:06

¶32

considering the nature of the offence and amicable settlement between the parties, quashed the proceedings in relation to offence under Sections 308/34 IPC.

¶33

Keeping in mind the overall facts of the case and the fact that parties have amicably settled their all disputes, continuing with criminal proceedings would serve no useful purpose. In any case, even the respective complainants do not wish to press any charges.

¶34

Accordingly, exercising inherent powers vested in this Court under Section 528 o f Bharatiya Nagarik Suraksha Sanhita, 2023 , it is deemed appropriate to quash the instant FIR.

¶35

Consequently, to secure the ends of justice, FIR No.0574/2024 dated 02.11.2024, registered at Police Station Jagat Puri, for commission of offence under Section 110 of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023 and FIR No.0591/2024 dated 22.11.2024, registered at Police Station Jagat Puri, for commission of offences under Sections 115/74/351(2)/79/3(5) of Bharatiya Nyaya Sanhita (BNS), 2023 , along with all consequential proceedings arising therefrom, are quashed subject to petitioners, in respective cases, depositing total cost of Rs. 25,000/- with Delhi High Court Staff Welfare Fund [Account no. 15530110074442: IFSC UCBA0001553] within four weeks from today. Proof of deposit of cost and original affidavits of the parties be submitted before the learned Trial Court within further two weeks.

¶36

The petitions stand disposed of in aforesaid terms.

¶37

(MANOJ JAIN)

¶38

JUDGE APRIL 8, 2026/ss/js

¶39

Signature Not Verified

¶40

CRL.M.C. 1509/2025 & W.P.(CRL) 1287/2025 4

¶41

Signed By:SONIA THAPLIYAL Signing Da te:1 0.04.2026 15:06:06

Harish Sagar & Anr. v. the State & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Harish Sagar & Anr. v. the State & Anr.

Case brief

What is this about?

What did the court decide?

Why is it important?

What the court decided

Issues for consideration

Cases cited

Statutes considered

Procedural history

Parties & counsel

Coram

Case details

Similar cases

Suraj Kumar Vs Government of NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Alliance Polychem Private Limited Vs Government of NCT of Delhi, through Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Mehrauli and Ors.

Shashi Bhushan @ Bitu Vs State (Nct of Delhi)

Divyansh Goel & Anr. Vs Directorate of Enforcement & Anr.

Dharmendra Yadav Vs the State Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Ors.

Anita Vs State of NCT Delhi & Ors.

Amit Kumar & Ors. Vs State (the NCT of Delhi) & Anr.

Vishwas Bhagwani & Anr. Vs State Govt. of NCT of Delhi and Anr.

Alliance Polychem Private Limited Vs Government of NCT of Delhi, through Sub-Divisional Magistrate, Mehrauli and Ors.

Salman and Others & Ors. Vs the State Govt of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Raju Gupta & Anr. Vs the State of NCT of Delhi & Anr.

Mohd Suhail Vs State of NCT of Delhi

Ms Bhanu Chaudhary Vs State NCT of Delhi & Ors.

Sujata Yadav Vs State NCT of Delhi